Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . .

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 1999 Week 5 Hansard (6 May) . . Page.. 1435 ..

MR HUMPHRIES: I do not want to be constrained by a deadline which I might not be able to meet, Mr Speaker. I thank members for their indulgence. Mr Speaker, I have only just this instant had the benefit of seeing the statutory declaration from Mr Mato Bender which makes reference to the allegations which seem to be at the centre of what the Opposition has put forward.

Mr Wood: No, only part of it.

MR HUMPHRIES: Only part of what you are saying, yes; but, on the basis of what was said on the radio this morning and what was said in the media this morning generally, I would characterise this document as a very important part of the claim that is being made by this place - - -

Mr Wood: Yes, but one aspect.

MR HUMPHRIES: I heard Mr Stanhope in silence, Mr Wood, and I ask for the same indulgence of this place.

MR SPEAKER: Excuse me, Mr Humphries. I am going to insist upon that this morning. Mr Stanhope was heard in silence and I expect - - -

Mr Stanhope: Relative silence. Mr Moore was not silent.

MR SPEAKER: No. There were two interjections of a minor nature. I do not intend to allow any further interjections from either side. This is an important issue and I would ask all members to respect that view.

MR HUMPHRIES: Mr Speaker, I have commented before in this place about the way in which motions of censure and no confidence have been used so frequently in this place as to debase the currency of those devices to express concern by the Assembly in the conduct of particular members. I have to say that again today we are seeing the misuse of this concept in a way which I think is quite disgraceful. I do not believe that what has been put forward today would even stack up to a motion of censure in me as Attorney-General, much less a motion of no confidence, a motion which, of course, has the consequence that I would have to step aside from my ministry and move to the back bench.

Mr Speaker, I heard Mr Stanhope on the radio this morning talking about this issue. The thing he talked about on the ABC this morning, both in an interview and in the news, was the issue of the visit by a member of my staff to the home of Mr and Mrs Bender. The extraordinary thing about the interview was the words he used, which were: "One would presume that she went with the authority of the Minister", "One would assume she was there doing his bidding", or words to that effect. We have had a motion of no confidence moved in this place today in a Minister of the Crown on the basis that Mr Stanhope presumes that, because a certain person who has a connection with me has gone to the home of a person and made a suggestion to that person, allegedly, that that person do certain things in respect of their legal representation, I, as Attorney-General and first law officer of this Territory, should step aside from my position and move to the back bench, lose my position as a Minister, and have my staff who are dependent on that position as

Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . .